Madison County Circuit Judge Nicholas Byron listened again to the Lakin Law Firm definition of "until," but again he could not accept it.
At a June 16 hearing Byron denied a motion to reconsider an April 21 order granting summary judgment to defendant HomEq Servicing.
Plaintiffs Thomas Hogle and Rebecca Hogle claimed HomEq charged an extra day of interest on a home loan.
Attorney Paul Marks of the Lakin firm argued that the loan note allowed interest until the date of closing.
At the hearing on summary judgment Marks argued that an Illinois Supreme Court decision of 1850 defined "until" to mean excluding.
At the hearing on reconsideration Marks said, "The word 'until' is exclusionary unless the parties intend it to be –"
Byron said, "You are citing that old case?"
Marks said he would cite the old case and another decision.
He quoted from the loan contract that, "Interest will be charged on unpaid principal."
He said, "That's the problem the defendant has. Even though the principal has been repaid they are still charging interest."
HomEq attorney Jeffrey Pilgrim said, "They have offered you nothing new here today."
He repeated his April 21 argument that, "If a student has until class, the event of class, to turn in his assignment, the student is certainly not required to turn it in the day before class."
Marks said, "This Court had a concern at the last hearing about the widespread nature of this practice. That is why we are here today."
Byron said, "No, no, no, no, no. Widespread in the context that this is a custom that in my opinion goes on."
Marks said, "It is not necessarily a custom in the industry. It happens every now and then."
Byron said, "Until to me is inclusive and I can't give it any other construction. If the appellate court tells me to, I will."